this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2026
665 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

79879 readers
3020 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 5) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] network_switch@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

For movies, look up what Alexa Mini's can do. The very recent past dominant Mini had a 3424x2202 resolution. Most movies shot digitally (most in the last like 20 years) were shot at below 4k. Many had special effects done at 1080p. When movie theaters switched to digital projection, most used 2048x1080 projectors and the shift towards 4k projectors wasn't that long ago.

The Alexa Mini LF can do 4448x3096. The Sony Venice 8k camera is a few years old only. There's a huge amount of loyalty to Arri, particularly the lenses. Panasonic and Z-Cam have 8k cameras. But like Arri, I'd bet most filmmakers would choose the 4k/6k cameras

Even the ones that opt for the 8k cameras, there very likely would be lower resolution cameras in use as well like the Alexa Mini or a 4k/6k Z-Cam or like a Sony FX3. Including most nature documentaries. Unless it's just wide canvases, you're not going to be mounting the 8k cinema cameras all over the place like you would cheaper small cameras like an FX3. Plus stuff like shooting at 240fps 12bit color for slow motion playback. I'm betting that none of the cinema cameras support that at 8k. So back down to probably 1080p. Don't know the status of 4k240 out there. That's a lot of bandwidth, storage, processing power, and cooling needed

Then there's 70mm filming. The vast majority of productions cannot do that. There's a lot of unused footage that goes into filmmaking. If you look at the size of a roll of 70mm film used for projecting a feature length film, it's huge. It's boutique equipment. There's not a ton of cinema 70mm cameras and lenses to rent. Camera operators. Labs to get them scanned for digital editing. 70mm will always be limited in adoption especially now that digital is the dominant form of cinematography

So 8k will for many many years be the land of upscaling and for native, old video games. Videos, I guess two 8k60 cameras rigged together for VR will lead the way along with an occasional movie/documentary. No guarantees that the movie theater will show it in 8k though. It's taken a very long time for 4k projection to approach standard for theaters in places like the US let alone poorer countries or countries with less mega theater chains that could more comfortably afford the upgrade

[–] dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 hours ago

I have bad eye sight, but also 8k probably never need to be a thing on a tv, more impressive for stuff thats closer to our eyes like VR headsets probably.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Honestly, we have way more work to do when it comes to brightness, contrast, and colour.

I'd rather a 1080p screen that has OLED infinite contrast and over 1000 nits of sustained brightness to be fully viewable during the day, over a resolution bump.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm fine with 100 nits and good contrast, better yet a e-paper alternative. Who wants to stare in a lightbulb all day?

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Someone who wants to be able to see the screen during the day when there's sunlight in the room, or someone who wants to be able to see the full spectrum of visual fidelity during a movie.

Its not like you're going to have a blank white image on screen all day, but if you want to accurately portray the contrast between say, the shadow of the jungle, and the bright colours of a bird that has sunlight glinting off it, then you need to be able to have the brightest parts be very bright and the darkest parts be very dark, because that's what reality looks like, the outdoors gets brighter then 100 nits.

[–] beemikeoak@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 21 hours ago

My old projector doesn't even have anyone knitting in it but it smells like grandma.

My vision is failing faster than resolutions are improving and most of the time I can't even tell the difference between 4k and 1080p. More interested in higher FPS content becoming more commonplace.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›